How The substitution of parental education by teen series can now be recommended by the media ?

Here are the headlines: "After 'Adolescence' in middle school, ten other intelligent series to show teenagers" — the link here: 20 Minutes Article. I quote: "Series have become valuable tools today for addressing societal issues with young people." We are witnessing a particularly worrying drift here.

Should we show "Adolescence" to middle school students? And after that, encourage the broadcasting of so-called "intelligent" series to adolescents to address sensitive topics? The question is raised in numerous articles, educational recommendations, and public discourses.

At first glance, the intention seems positive: it is better for young people to see, hear, and identify with something rather than being kept in ignorance. Fiction thus becomes a way to approach complex themes and makes it easier for parents to broach the subject.

But this logic, if unquestioned, masks another reality: we are witnessing a continuous and silent shift in educational responsibility. What is being put in place, under the guise of modernity or openness, is a scripted, diverted, de-parentalized, and irresponsible education.

The series, a new educational medium?

More and more media outlets are presenting lists of series "to show teenagers" as gentle solutions to address difficult themes: bullying, sexuality, identity, violence, and malaise. The article from 20 Minutes on "Ten intelligent series to show teenagers" perfectly illustrates this trend.

These recommendations are based on an implicit idea: showing fiction would be enough to trigger awareness. But this belief reverses the meaning of the educational approach. Showing is not transmitting. Watching is not understanding. And above all: a series is not neutral.

What a series does: exaggerate, simplify, impose a point of view

A series is not meant to faithfully reflect reality. It seeks to captivate. To do this, it accentuates conflicts, dramatizes situations, and pushes characters to emotional extremes.

In this context, what is shown often becomes what is perceived as representative. The family is presented as a source of tension. Adults are ineffective or absent. School is violent or powerless. Romantic relationships are defined by breakup, pressure, or fear.

These narrative choices have an effect. They end up building implicit expectations about what is normal, what to fear, and how life should unfold.

What adolescents see: stories they absorb without always questioning

Adolescence is a period of construction. It is also a period of fragility, emotional intensity, and search for reference points. Neuroscience has shown that the adolescent brain is particularly receptive to striking images, strong situations, and identifiable stories.

But just because an adolescent understands what they see does not mean they are able to grasp its limits or discuss its meaning. What they see, they can keep within themselves without perspective. What they feel, they can take as truth.

Fiction then becomes a filter through which they judge others, adults, and sometimes themselves.

What adults allow to happen: delegating without realizing it

The most concerning aspect is not the series themselves, but the use made of them. When we rely on them to address subjects without preparation or real discussion, we gradually slide towards a form of educational abdication.

The parent watches from afar, the teacher shows a few excerpts, the young person watches alone or with peers. And the narrative imposed by the series takes the place of dialogue, questioning, and doubt.

There is no one left to say: what you just saw is not the truth. It is a staging. Yet that is what education is: offering a framework, naming what is at play, preventing fiction from replacing reality.

What needs to be rediscovered: the time to talk, explain, and contradict

It is not about banning series or rejecting fiction. But about remembering that it is not fiction that educates. It is adults who give meaning to what is seen. It is exchanges that allow understanding. It is contradictions that teach us to think.

We can use a series, but on the condition of not being satisfied with it alone. What it tells is a certain exaggerated vision, not a conclusion. And this requires time, presence, words, the ability to listen, analyze, and explain with nuance.

Conclusion

Letting series establish themselves as default educational tools is taking a risk: that of abandoning adolescents to narratives they sometimes believe in more than we imagine. The state already absolves parents of enough responsibility at many levels.

A society that replaces adult discourse with episodes of fiction, even well-made ones, risks a silent fracture. Education cannot be delegated to platforms. It is neither their role nor their responsibility.

What young people experience, what they think, what they fear, or seek to understand deserves better than caricatured images. It deserves relationships, exchanges, contradictions, and adults who assume the role of thinking with them, rather than thinking for them.